Q1 what is the criteria laid for AQEEDAh, is aqeedah the
differentiator between a Muslim and kafir, and if one does not consider
the
world of grave as reality what is the ruling on that person because he
thinks that its not 100% sure.

The differentiator is that whoever unambiguously denies an aspect
of the Religion that is obligatorily known - e.g. denying the fact that
praying five times a day is obligatory - is considered a disbeliever. One
who does not consider the life in the grave a reality is a Mu`tazili, and/or
Shi`i, and/or belonging to one of the philosophical or other multifarious
non-Sunni sects in Islam whose belief varies from bid`a to kufr although on
that very point they are considered Muslim.

Can `Aqida be based on single-narrator narrations (ahad hadith)

Q2 can one take into its Aqeedah narrations from ahad hadith

The vast majority of the Scholars consider that sound (sahih) ahad hadiths
are obligatory to practice and believe without the incurring of disbelief
(kufr) but only sin (fisq) for whoever denies their validity, and the ruling
of kufr applies only to mutawatir narrations such as the Qur'an and non-ahad
hadiths. However, the collective weight of certain ahad hadiths whose
*meaning* - short of their actual chains - has tawatur status, dictates that
they be included in `aqida, this being the case of many of the narrations
pertaining to the afterlife although those of the punishment in the grave
are mutawatir.

Belief in da`if hadith

Q3 as far as i know we have to believe 100% in every ahadith
transmitted to us even though its daef, because daef implies to the isnad
not to the matan, doubting could mean that one is doubting the words of
the
Prophet , but if one does not believe in it 100% what is the ruling on
him

Not only is there no sin in not believing 100% in the attribution of a da`if
hadith to the Prophet , but it is a pre-condition for our use of the
da`if hadith that we should not positively attribute it to the Prophet
. Furthermore, da`if can apply to the isnad; it can apply to the matn;
and it can apply to both at once. We have to believe 100% and practice
everything that comes to us from the Prophet through tawatur such as
the rulings of the Qur'an and those of mutawatir hadiths as well as the
Consensus of the Companions. Whatever is not of that level has a different
status.

Blind belief

Q4 can one have blind belief in Allah SWT meaning that they can
not prove it rationally or logically, if so please provide references

Proving one's belief rationally or logically is a contradiction, as belief
is by definition in what lies beyond the probative power of reason and
logic. However, if you mean by "blind belief" ignorance of its proofs - or
most of its proofs - in the Shari`a, then that is the position of the
"general public" (`awamm) of the Muslims and belief is not harmed by it,
although it is probably incomplete or weak and definitely more vulnerable
than the belief of the `Alim. Hence Allah Most High orders us to seek strong
and discerning faith with the command { Know / Learn / Understand / Realize
that there is no God except ALLAH} . Similarly the responsibility of the
`Alim is greater and his sin weightier. May Allah forgive all and guide all.

Can a non-scholar issue a fatwa?

Q5 what is the ruling on the person that is not a scholar issuing
fawtas.

This is impermissible and haram unless he is merely reporting the fatwa of a
qualified scholar, which itself is allowed only on condition that he does so
without changing the context or wording of what he is transmitting.
Otherwise, "Whoever gives fatwa without knowledge, the angels of the heaven
and the earth curse him" as reported from the Prophet by Ibn `Asakir
(al-Suyuti, Haba'ik p. 187 #694).

As `Umar said, such false muftis are the enemies of the Religion,
misguided and misguiding, and their fatwas are null and void. And Ibn `Umar
said: "Do not give any response except with the speaking Qur'an (biqur'anin
natiqin) or a Sunna that has precedent (sunnatin madiya). If you do
otherwise, you have perished and caused others to perish." By "the speaking
Qur'an" he means unambiguous and unabrogated. And Hudhayfa said: "Other than
an Imam [i.e. the Sultan] or a governor, or a man who can tell [i.e. through
knowledge of the Sunna] the abrogating verses of the Qur'an from the
abrogated, anyone who gives fatwa is an overreaching fool."

Calling scholars names

Q6 what is the ruling on the person that calls a respected
scholars bad names.

It varies from fisq to kufr, and our refuge is Allah Most High from the
slips of the tongue and obduracy. Examples of bid`a are the excesses
committed by Ibn Hazm in his disparagement of the Ulema in his
banned book al-Fisal wa al-Nihal; al-Mawdudi against the Ulema; Sayyid
Qutb against the Ulema; etc. This bid`a can become kufr when the Ulema as a
whole are insulted, or compared to non-Muslims, such as in the statements:
"What is this caste system of our Ulema?" or "The approach, methodology, and
objectives of the Ulema have all now become invalid" - this is blatant kufr.
Close to this also is the specific revilement of the Ash`ari and Maturidi
Ulema - who form the massive majority of Ahl al-Sunna - in the books of
al-Khajnadi, al-Albani, al-Tuwayjiri, al-Madkhali, and other
Wahhabi / "Salafi" writers. The only exception is when the permitted
discreditation of certain Ulema by the authorities has solid grounds in the
Shari`a, such as the Ulema's disparagement of Ibn Taymiyya and his followers
in certain aspects of `aqida and fiqh, or the jarh of weak narrators, liars,
and forgers in hadith. Detailed rulings that pertains to badmouthing the
Ulema of Islam can be found in Damad Effendi's Majma` al-Anhur (p. 695),
Tahir al-Bukhari's Khulasat al-Fatawa printed with al-Lacknawi's Majmu`at
al-Fatawa (Lahore ed. vol. 3-4 p. 388) and other Hanafi manuals.

Is our `aqida the same as that of the Sahaba?

Q7 what is the ruling on a person that say's aware aqeedah is
different to the sahabah because we did not have the Prophet, and because
of
fabrications in hadith therefore we have to be careful what we take into
aqeedah, so they say only matawatir hadith.

It is impermissible to say that the `aqida of Muslims today is different
from that of the Sahaba but Ahl al-Sunna only admit mutawatir-rank evidence
as a basis in defining Islamic `aqida. Only a handful of innovators such as
Albani differed.

Non-scholar debating without sources

Q8 what is the ruling on a person that is not a scholar and has
debates and while he is debating because he is not a scholar does not
quote
a scholar to say why he is saying what he is saying.

He is a fasiq who is committing a sin and should fear for the light of his
faith to be extinguished by wrangling and disputation. One with simple
ignorance i.e. with no knowledge is usually less far from admitting his
error than one with compounded ignorance, i.e. with some knowledge. The
latter may slide down from being a fasiq to being a mubtadi`.

Protection of the Sunnah

Q9 Allah SWT say's in the Quran to the nearest meaning that he
has
protected the Quran does that mean also the Hadith/SUNNA.

Yes, because the Sunna is the guarantee that we understand the Qur'an
correctly, not like those deviants who call themselves "Qur'an-only", or
extremist Shi`is who lie about the integrity of the Qur'an, or
anthropomorphists, or philosophers, or modernists, all of whom do not
understand the Qur'an because they have no knowledge of the Sunna. The
Sunna is the "non-recited Revelation" (wahyun ghayr matluw) just as the
Qur'an is the "recited Revelation" (wahyun matluw).

Does `aqida change over time?

Q10 does OUR Aqeedah change from generation to generations
because
we have ahad hadith and mutawatir.

No. Al-Hamdu lillah, our `Aqida is that of the Prophet and the
Congregation of the Companions without change, preserved until the end of
time as Allah Most High has promised and as the Prophet guaranteed.

Can an ahad hadith be used for `aqida?

Q11 does any scholar ever say that we can not take into aqeedah
ahad hadith.

Most of the Fuqaha' and Ahl al-Hadith say it from the time of the Salaf to
ours with the exception of the likes of Ibn al-Qayyim and al-Albani. This
does not mean that one is free to reject any and all lone-narrator reports
as not binding! On the contrary, as we said, they are binding, but are not
retained to define the `Aqida of every Muslim for to deny any aspect of the
latter is kufr whereas as we said the denial of any ahad hadith is only
fisq.

Calling a Muslim 'kafir'

Q12 what is the ruling on a Muslim that calls another Muslim
kafir
and publishes it.

Ibn `Abidin in his Rasa'il (2:291 Sall al-Husam al-Hindi) said that a Muslim
who unjustly calls another Muslim kafir commits kufr if he really considers
him kafir but not if he only intents to insult him. In the latter case he
only commits fisq. We seek refuge in Allah from the accusations of the
ignorant and the fitan of our times.

Is wiping over khuffs a tenet of faith?

Q13 what is the ruling on a person that does not believe in
wiping
over the leather socks as a practice of the Prophet SAW and is it part of
Aqeedah tenets of Faith.

He is a Shi`i and/or person of similar innovation and one should not pray
behind him due to his belief that wiping over the khuffs is not a Sunna;
however, there is no consensus that it is part of `aqida to believe in its
Sunna character, hence Imam Abu Hanifa only said: "I FEAR disbelief (kufr)
for one who denies it," i.e. it may lead him to kufr without consisting in
kufr by itself. And Allah knows best.

`Aqida and tasdiq

Q14 is there a difference between AQEEDAH AND TASDEEQ, believing
and trusting. Meaning that belief is 100% but trusting is not

`Aqida is the general term for belief, of which tasdeeq is a part. But
tasdeeq is not just "trusting": it means confirmation i.e. with the tongue.
One definition of iman goes: "`aqd bil-qalb wa tasdiq bil-lisan wal-`amal
bil-arkan" i.e. conviction in the heart; confirmation with the tongue; and
deeds with the limbs. However, there is Consensus that the most essential
part and the indispensable foundation of Islamic belief is conviction in the
heart. Yet the latter is not sufficient to be considered a Muslim and
confirmation must be added. Then confirmation becomes insufficient and deeds
must join it. In this respect there is a difference between `aqd, tasdeeq,
and `amal, all of which form belief. Similarly in the hadith of Gibril a
difference is made between iman and islam although in a different context
one never goes without the other.

Do some matters make one a fasiq?

Q15 are there matters in Aqeedah that does not make one kafir but
Fasiq

Plenty of matters, although they are more properly called bid`a which is
worse than fisq. This is the case of the beliefs held by most of the
seventy-two sects that are in the Fire. For example, not believing in the
life of the grave; or not believing that our Prophet is alive in his
grave and returning our Salam [e.g. Albani]; or believing that Allah Most
High is actually on top of the seventh heaven, sitting on a Throne although
this may be kufr (cf. Ibn Nujaym, al-Bahr al-Ra'iq 5:129-130); or, as held
by the Shi`is that the Qur'an is created and that there is no such thing as
the vision of Allah Most High in the Hereafter; or that for a Muslim to
commit a grave sin is kufr; or that Allah is "like a king who is unable to
contravene the law of his kingdom and needs a good reason to allow his
minister to intercede for a thief" as in the chapter on intercession in the
book Taqwiyat al-Iman; or that Prophets are "only human beings like you and
me" and that their `Isma - immunity to sin - is sometimes suspended, as held
by al-Mawdudi.

Following only one school of fiqh

Q16 If one fallows a school of fiqh does he have to fallow it in every matter,
if he does not, is he a person of bidah

You mean "follow"; fallow means to leave earth unplanted after plowing.
No to both questions. For example, Shafi`is in Hajj routinely follow the
other Schools in the matter of non-cancellation of wudu' upon skin contact
with the other sex. However, one may not follow two different Schools inside
one and the same type of worship, for example, if in the latter case a
Shafi`i does not renew his wudu' and decides to follow the Hanafi ruling in
the matter, then has a nosebleed, he cannot then decide to follow the
Shafi`i ruling that his wudu' is still valid. One way or the other his wudu'
is cancelled.